Re: DUML
- From: "Andy Dingley" <dingbat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Apr 2007 05:34:57 -0700
On 10 Apr, 21:43, "bkard...@xxxxxxxxx" <bkard...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In a model-view-controller architecture, N-tier design,
Be careful when conflating N-tier with MVC. You can produce some
braind-dead pseudo-MVC that way.
templating systems like asp,jsp,php,velocity (etc) provide the
"view". The view is HTML which is interpreted by your browser to form
a tree.
If you're using AJAX, why are you duplicating a "view" onto the
server? This is my basic criticism of DUML - it's a server-side
rendition of a view that doesn't (and shouldn't) exist until it hits
the client.
Abstract SOA architectures should only provide a model. They can't do
this in practice, so SOA-based interactive applications in particular
find themselves implementing a controller too. They certainly
shouldn't be implementing the view though, that sits as close to the
client as possible. If you have AJAX, then you instantiate the view on
the client. If you only have a dumb HTML client, then you might have
to push view-generation back to the server (that's OK too). What you
should avoid is having AJAX available yet getting no more benefit from
it than access to a server-geneated view. What's _really_ bad is DUML,
the idea that some client-DOM-tweaking language has any justification
for being anywhere near the server. That's even a retrograde step back
from 1991 HTML.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: DUML
- From: bkardell@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: DUML
- Prev by Date: Re: A multilingual site in html?
- Next by Date: Re: shopping for an html editor
- Previous by thread: Re: DUML
- Next by thread: Re: DUML
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
